Friday, March 25, 2016

A Final word on the “Biden Rule,” by Vice President Joe Biden, and GOP wants another Judge Bork!!

"So now I hear all this talk about the ‘Biden Rule,’”
the vice president said at the Georgetown University Law Center. “It’s frankly
ridiculous. There is no 'Biden Rule.' It doesn’t exist.”

He a while to come out and correct Republicans, but Biden finally found the time.

He said there is “only one rule I ever followed on the
Judiciary Committee, that was the Constitution’s clear rule of advice and
consent.”Biden defended his record during his years as chairman of
the Senate Judiciary Committee, painting Republicans’ Supreme Court blockade as
a desperate gambit that “could lead to a genuine constitutional crisis.”During his time as chairman or ranking member of the
Judiciary panel, Biden said, all eight high court nominees received a hearing
and a floor vote. “Every nominee, including Justice [Anthony] Kennedy — in an
election year— got an up-or-down vote,” he said. “Not much of the time. Not
most of the time. Every single time.”Leaving a seat vacant creates the possibility of a 4-4 tie
in consequential cases, which leaves a lower court’s decision in place. That could result in a “patchwork Constitution” where laws
are unevenly applied throughout the country, Biden said, and in turn “deepen
the gulf between the haves and have-nots. The meaning and extent of your federal constitutional
rights — freedom of speech, freedom to follow the teachings of your faith or to
determine what constitutes teaching of your faith, the right to be free from
unreasonable search and seizure — all could depend on where you happen to
live,” he said. I think most people in this country would call that unfair
and unacceptable.”

For comparison, I thought it would be interesting to take a look at what's behind the Republican resentment toward Democratic nominees for the Supreme Court. For Republicans, Judge Robert Bork was the best justice they never had, thanks to the Democrats.

As Franken and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) swiftly pointed
out, Bork, whose nomination to the Supreme Court was rejected
by a bipartisan 58-42 vote in 1987, received both a vote and a hearing.
Nevertheless, Hatch maintained that this vote was a turning point in the politics
of Supreme Court nominations. Bork, Hatch claimed, was “one of the greatest
legal minds we’ve had,” and Bork’s rejection was the beginning of the cycle of
escalating efforts by both parties to keep the other party’s nominees off the
Supreme Court, according to Hatch.

What was churning around in that conservative activist legal mind?

Hatch does have a point. Republicans have long viewed
Bork as a fallen martyr,Judge Bork’s opponents made a weighty case against his
nomination in 1987 ... Bork had a long
history of criticizing progressive Supreme Court decisions. Bork opposed
the doctrine of one person/one vote, which eliminated malapportionment of state
legislatures that gave rural votes far more representation than urban voters.
He criticized decisions striking down racial covenants in housing and those
banning voter literacy tests. He attacked a decision invalidating poll taxes.
And he opposed Supreme Court decisions saying that the Constitution forbids the
government from discriminating against women — arguing instead that “the Equal
Protection Clause probably should be kept to things like race and ethnicity.”

Yes, what a great legal mind?

Bork’s most well-known statement, however, most likely came
from a 1963 article he published in the New Republic, which opposed federal
bans on race discrimination by businesses. The principle behind such laws, Bork
argued, “is that if I find your behavior ugly by my standards, moral or
aesthetic, and if you prove stubborn about adopting my view of the situation, I
am justified in having the state coerce you into more righteous paths. That
is itself a principle of unsurpassed ugliness.” (Bork later repudiated this
statement — although he did not repudiate many of his other previously
expressed views.)

Blog Hits

Politifact News

Followers (but non-conformists)

Twitter Updates

Twitter Updates

One Man's Challenge to a Party Bent on Destruction

Politics: Just a guy tired of "compromising." Stop encouraging Republicans when it comes to their failed ideology.
I was once a liberal radio talk host. Played co-host to Vicki McKenna, a complete liar who can't can't stop filling the airwaves with mindless babble.
I'm someone who enjoys the the painful smiles of conservatives as they struggle to deny the avalanche of facts tumbling their way. They seem preoccupied with spelling and grammar.
Real Estate: I also hosted a real estate radio show.
Currently dabbling in part time work.